record the baby goats’ activities. This
way, if the baby goats were to escape,
the students could better understand
how their prototypes had failed,
enabling them to iterate and design
a better solution. The time-lapse
footage captured more than 24 hours
of activity and revealed a structural
weakness in one of the prototypes.

(A goat stood on top of the PVC
piping, causing the fence to fail.) That
marked the beginning of the students
learning about the difference between
static and dynamic load-bearing force
on materials.

We sketched out how we wouldimprove our designs with a greaterfocus on structural integrity (addingmore crossbeams to create a strongerstructure) and how to stop the goatsfrom chewing on the strings (trimmingthem). We also discussed how wemight measure the weight and forceof a goat to ensure our designs couldwithstand that amount of force. Unfor-tunately, we could not make a newprototype of these iterations becauseour school year was ending, but we arediscussing the possibility of workingon this project this year. After all,complex problems are often not solvedon the first attempt. However, studentscelebrated that we were able to containthe baby goats for more than 72 hoursbefore they escaped. (To view a videoof the full project, visit www.youtube.com/watch?v=7enVlcMTDUk.)Because of its exploratory and inter-disciplinary nature, the project gavestudents a wealth of rich learningopportunities. By the end, they hadlearned about and successfully appliedcontent related to area, perimeter,angles, 2–D and 3–D shapes, and non-standard units; organism needs, pred-ator-prey relationships, and static anddynamic load-bearing; and augmentingdigital images, video editing, time-lapse video, and GoPro video. Addi-tionally, adults intentionally addressed21st-century and social-emotionallearning skills during each design-thinking session, including how to bea good group member, work throughfrustration, communicate respect-fully and effectively in both writtenand verbal form, and give and receivefeedback.

What About the Tests?

To develop the skills necessary to
apply rigorous and relevant content,
we believe it’s important that all
students in grades K– 12 engage in a
design-thinking opportunity at least
once during the school year. Not just
gifted students or those who identify
as STEM. All students. By the time
a 1st grader becomes a high school
senior, a student in our school will
have engaged in at least 60 problem-based learning projects.

We’re frequently asked how
the school has made room for this
STEAM-supported design thinking
when we’re still responsible for
performance on state standardized
assessments. We’ve found that this
question derives from a false premise:
Either you prepare your kids for the
state test or you prepare kids to be
21st-century problem solvers. In fact,
you can do both at the same time.
Pennsylvania’s standardized math and
science assessment standards for grade
4 include verbs like observe, identify,
explain, use, make, apply, solve, develop,
extend, and create. Sound familiar?
They should. They’re all used routinely
as learning targets in well-crafted,
problem-based learning scenarios like
design thinking.

We measure the success of infusing
problem-based learning opportunities
across the curriculum in multiple
ways. We’ve observed students’
increased abilities to “un-silo” their